Search results

1 – 10 of 620
Book part
Publication date: 8 April 2015

J. Daniel Hammond

This paper compares the contexts of the writing of T. R. Malthus’s first edition of An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798); its reception by William Godwin, to whom the…

Abstract

This paper compares the contexts of the writing of T. R. Malthus’s first edition of An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798); its reception by William Godwin, to whom the Essay was addressed; its interpretation by naturalists Charles Darwin and Alfred Russell Wallace; and its interpretation by modern commentators Kenneth Boulding and A. M. C. Waterman. The analysis helps explain how an essay that was written to defend social and economic institutions from critiques in utopian visions associated with the French Revolution came to be regarded as a model predicting overpopulation and exhaustion of natural resources.

Details

A Research Annual
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78441-857-1

Keywords

Book part
Publication date: 17 July 2006

A.M.C. Waterman

“Bob” Malthus, the Revd T. Robert Malthus (1766–1834), had only one son, Henry (“Hal”) who like his father became a clergyman and married, but died childless in 1882. Malthus's…

Abstract

“Bob” Malthus, the Revd T. Robert Malthus (1766–1834), had only one son, Henry (“Hal”) who like his father became a clergyman and married, but died childless in 1882. Malthus's older brother “Syd,” Sydenham II (1754–1821), inherited the family property in Albury, Surrey on the death of their father Daniel in 1800, and transmitted it to three more generations of descendents: Sydenham III (1806–1868), Sydenham IV (1831–1916), and the last Robert (1881–1972) who married but died childless.

Details

Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-76231-349-5

Book part
Publication date: 23 December 2010

Nigel F.B. Allington

One of the several claims that Seligman makes for Rooke is that he should be accorded priority in the discovery of the correct, that is Ricardian, doctrine of rent:there seems…

Abstract

One of the several claims that Seligman makes for Rooke is that he should be accorded priority in the discovery of the correct, that is Ricardian, doctrine of rent:there seems little doubt that the doctrine of rent was developed practically simultaneously by Malthus, West, Torrens and Rooke in 1814, but so far as the priority of actual publication is concerned, the above list should be reversed. And in the interests of historical accuracy, Rooke and Torrens must hereafter be accorded the position which they deserve. (Seligman, 1903, p. 512)1

Details

English, Irish and Subversives among the Dismal Scientists
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-061-3

Article
Publication date: 1 June 1982

Vasant P. Pethe

Use of the Malthusian Paradigm for Justification of Compulsory Family Planning One of the most important issues in the contemporary debate concerning population policy has been…

Abstract

Use of the Malthusian Paradigm for Justification of Compulsory Family Planning One of the most important issues in the contemporary debate concerning population policy has been the question of compulsion in family planning (or more specifically, compulsory sterilisation) for the quantitative control of population. The present‐day demographic scene in the Third World is characterised as one of “population explosion”. It is argued that despite the spread of family planning and the recent trends towards decline in fertility among two‐thirds of the populations of the developing countries, the burden of the population problem in terms of the requirements on the eve of the 21st century is not going to be light, considering the limited and fast depleting resources of this slender globe. Hence, pressures have been mounting from various quarters towards more and more stringent measures converging on coercion to control the family size and population growth in the low‐income countries. For example, during the Emergency in India (1975–77), it was felt by the then Government (under the prime ministership of Mrs Indira Gandhi), the ruling Congress Party and some groups and individuals that the time had come to put the population problems of the country on a war footing and adopt drastic measures such as compulsory sterilisation to meet the hydra‐headed scourge of over‐population. In fact, the Government of Maharashtra, a state within the Union of India, went a step further and pioneered for the first time in history a bill on the compulsory sterilisation of eligible persons, for introduction in the State Legislative Assembly which passed a revised version of this bill (1976). To support and justify compulsion in family planning, various arguments — scientific and pseudo‐scientific — are usually made. At the head of all the arguments is most distinctly the Malthusian — or rather the neo‐Malthusian — argument. The novelty of the Malthusian argument made is that it is advanced this time to present a justification, not for the mere control of population by some voluntary means, but for a strict regulation of the size of each family in society through the instrumentality of physical force having the sanction of the law of the land and having penal provisions for the defaulters. It is the major concern of this essay to examine whether and how far the Malthusian paradigm is relevant, adequate and correct, vis‐à‐vis the issue of compulsion in family planning. What exactly is the basis of the neo‐Malthusian position on compulsion? Would Malthus, if he were amongst us, have supported compulsory family planning for the reasons which generally go under the caption of Malthusianism? Is the issue of compulsion in family planning so narrow as to be capable of being fully tackled by the Malthusian paradigm? These are some of the important questions which are sought to be explored in the short space available for this article.

Details

International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 9 no. 6/7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0306-8293

Book part
Publication date: 23 December 2010

G.C.G. Moore and Michael V. White

There is no exaggeration in the claim that abstract-deductive political economy in pre-Tractarian Oxford was driven by Richard Whately and hence centred at Oriel College. At this…

Abstract

There is no exaggeration in the claim that abstract-deductive political economy in pre-Tractarian Oxford was driven by Richard Whately and hence centred at Oriel College. At this time Oriel was defined by a group of intellectuals now commonly referred to as the Oriel Noetics, of whom Whately was one, and the nature of Oxford political economy in the opening decades of the nineteenth century (including William F. Lloyd's contribution to it) cannot be understood outside the context of the intellectual tradition established by the Oriel Noetics. The Noetics were unconventional reformist clerics (one could not use the slippery mid-Victorian word ‘liberal’, as they were predominantly conservative Whigs or reform-minded Tories of the Pitt mould, in which order and tradition were maintained through moderate, but not radical, change); admired rational thought and absent-mindedly tested social conventions with their speech; were unafraid to question religious shibboleths if they deemed them bereft of scriptural foundation (such as Sabbatarianism); deployed logical processes to bolster their religious beliefs, which they held in an unsentimental fashion, and thereby to some extent practised that most contradictory of creeds, a logical faith; and, most importantly for this chapter, constructed a Christian Political Economy by dichotomising knowledge into a theological domain, in which they inferred from scriptural evidence that individuals should pursue the ends of attaining specific virtues (not utility!), and a scientific domain, in which they deduced scientific laws that would enable individuals to achieve the ends of attaining these virtues. They looked upon the rising Romantic Movement in general and the spiritualist yearnings of the Oxford Tractarians in particular with simple incomprehension, if not disgust. They deplored with equal measure the Evangelicals' enthusiasms, willing incogitency and lack of institutional anchor, yet sought to establish a broader national church that included dissenters (but not Catholics). They were most prominent in the 1810s and 1820s before colliding violently in the 1830s with, and being sidelined by, the Tractarians, many of whom they had, ironically enough, mentored and promoted.2

Details

English, Irish and Subversives among the Dismal Scientists
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-061-3

Book part
Publication date: 23 December 2010

Samuel Hollander

Elie Halévy essentially expressed the view recorded by James Mill in his anonymously written ‘On the Nature, Measures, and Causes of Value’7 that the first chapter of the Critical

Abstract

Elie Halévy essentially expressed the view recorded by James Mill in his anonymously written ‘On the Nature, Measures, and Causes of Value’7 that the first chapter of the Critical Dissertation relating to the nature of value ‘contains not an assertion, who which, as far as ideas politico-economical are concerned, Mr. Ricardo would not have assented; it contains, not indeed, as far as such ideas are concerned, an assertion which is not implied in the propositions which Mr. Ricardo has put forth. It is a criticism on some of Mr. Ricardo's forms of expression…’ ([J. Mill], 1826a, p. 157). The justification for the Ricardian reaction is clear enough, as I shall now show.8

Details

English, Irish and Subversives among the Dismal Scientists
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-061-3

Book part
Publication date: 23 December 2010

John Pullen

If a reason is sought for not neglecting Cazenove, we need look no further than to his views on demand, consumption, saving and gluts, and to his criticisms of what he called…

Abstract

If a reason is sought for not neglecting Cazenove, we need look no further than to his views on demand, consumption, saving and gluts, and to his criticisms of what he called ‘Say's principle’ and ‘Say's new theory’.

Details

English, Irish and Subversives among the Dismal Scientists
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-85724-061-3

Abstract

Details

Histories of Economic Thought
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-0-76230-997-9

Article
Publication date: 1 July 2005

Sue Malthus and Carolyn Fowler

During the 1990s the value to an intending professional accountant of undertaking a period of liberal (general) studies was promoted internationally by a number of individuals and…

Abstract

During the 1990s the value to an intending professional accountant of undertaking a period of liberal (general) studies was promoted internationally by a number of individuals and organisations, including the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) and the New Zealand Institute of Chartered Accountants (the “Institute”). The Institute significantly changed its admissions policy for Chartered Accountants in 1996 and one change was to require four years of degree level study with a compulsory liberal studies component. This study surveys the perceptions of New Zealand accounting practitioners on the impact of this compulsory liberal component. The results of this study demonstrate that there is little support from accounting practitioners for IFAC’s claim that liberal education “can contribute significantly to the acquisition of professional skills”, including intellectual, personal and communication skills. In addition, the majority of respondents did not perceive any improvements in the professional skills of the staff that had qualified under the Institute’s current admissions policy. However, any perceived improvements were mainly attributed to the Institute’s admissions policy change. Notwithstanding the lack of support for the assertion that liberal education develops professional skills, there is a strong belief by respondents in the value of liberal education for intending professional accountants.

Details

Pacific Accounting Review, vol. 17 no. 2
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0114-0582

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 1 March 1981

Priyatosh Maitra

In a letter written on 24 January, 1865 to Schewitzer, Marx, commenting on the work of Proudhon, observed: “Take, for instance, Malthus's book on population. In its first edition…

Abstract

In a letter written on 24 January, 1865 to Schewitzer, Marx, commenting on the work of Proudhon, observed: “Take, for instance, Malthus's book on population. In its first edition it was nothing but a sensational pamphlet … and yet what a stimulus was produced by this libel on the human race.”

Details

International Journal of Social Economics, vol. 8 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0306-8293

1 – 10 of 620